[lkml]   [2002]   [Jun]   [7]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] Futex Asynchronous Interface
Rusty Russell wrote:
> In message <> you wri
> te:
>>Do we have major and minor numbers for sockets and populate /dev
>>with them? No. And as a result, there has _never_ been any sysadmin
>>problems with either.
> Ummm... you don't do much network programming, do you Linus? Don't
> confuse familiarity with fondness: the socket API is *not* a good
> model to copy.
>>You already have to have a system call to bind the particular fd to the
>>futex _anyway_, so do the only sane thing, and allocate the fd _there_,
>>and get rid of that stupid and horrible /dev/futed which only buys you
>>pain, system administration, extra code, and a black star for being
> Yet another special way to create a special fd? Hmm...
> That might be better than what I proposed, but it's not the epitomy of
> taste either.

What about /proc/futex then? Less adminstrative work, clean interface
(also for shell scripts like Alan suggested).
Al Viro would like this, it's more like Plan9 or QNX6. :)

Give it an entry in the namespace, why not with sockets (unix and ip) also?

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:26    [W:0.100 / U:43.676 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site